*/
The Ministry of Justice acted swiftly to introduce new payment arrangements for publicly funded judicial review cases, after the Divisional Court’s ruling that the “no permission no fee” regulation, which limited access to judicial review, was unlawful and inconsistent with the purpose of LASPO.
The new regulations reflect the general policy set out under the previous provisions of the Civil Legal Aid (Remuneration) (Amendment) (No 3) Regulations 2014 and mean that payment for work on an application for judicial review is not allowed unless permission is granted or certain other specified instances to take into account the Divisional Court’s findings apply.
The new regulations reflect the general policy set out under the previous provisions of the Civil Legal Aid (Remuneration) (Amendment) (No 3) Regulations 2014 and mean that payment for work on an application for judicial review is not allowed unless permission is granted or certain other specified instances to take into account the Divisional Court’s findings apply.
The Ministry of Justice acted swiftly to introduce new payment arrangements for publicly funded judicial review cases, after the Divisional Court’s ruling that the “no permission no fee” regulation, which limited access to judicial review, was unlawful and inconsistent with the purpose of LASPO.
The Chair of the Bar sets out how the new government can restore the justice system
In the first of a new series, Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth considers the fundamental need for financial protection
Unlocking your aged debt to fund your tax in one easy step. By Philip N Bristow
Possibly, but many barristers are glad he did…
Mental health charity Mind BWW has received a £500 donation from drug, alcohol and DNA testing laboratory, AlphaBiolabs as part of its Giving Back campaign
The Institute of Neurotechnology & Law is thrilled to announce its inaugural essay competition
The Chair of the Bar launches a Manifesto for Justice as campaigning gets under way
How best to prepare for your foreign language clients to ensure fairness and avoid strike out? The onus is on counsel to be alive to language issues, says Oliver Foy, who offers a cautionary case and practical tips